Book Review: Leaving ADDIE for SAM, by Michael Allen with Richard Sites

“Good instruction is inspirational. It captures both the power of knowledge and skill as well as the joy of becoming competent. Good learning experiences aren’t just about facts, they are about becoming a more proficient, capable, and valuable person. Knowing that the destination is the big three Ms (meaningful, memorable, and motivational), we can tailor a process that pushes in the right direction. It’s in the pursuit of just such a process that successive approximation was born.”

From the outset of his latest
book, Leaving ADDIE for SAM, Michael
Allen tells us this is not a book about instructional design (“at least it wasn’t
intended to be,” he says). Having spent the last few days engrossed by its
contents, I am here to tell you it is most certainly a book that makes you think about instructional design. The
successes and the failures. The steps and the processes. The SMEs and the
content. And the meetings … oh, the meetings.

For the lucky among us, we’ve
seen extraordinary learning programs created by teams of engaged stakeholders
and creative designers and developers that produce real, measurable changes in
performance. For most of us, unfortunately, we often see programs created by
those same stakeholders, designers, and developers producing dismal results at
best. These programs look like training (“Hey,
we’ve got a pre-test and post-test.”). They sound like training (“Upon completion of this course, you will be
able to….”).Some of them even smell like training (“Mmm … coffee and doughnuts.”). And while
most instructional designers will argue that they used the time-tested ADDIE
model to produce those training programs, Leaving
ADDIE for SAM will (one hopes) challenge them to think about some of the
limitations and challenges of such a linear process and look to the iterative
and collaborative opportunities afforded by SAM, the successive approximation
model.

SAM: The Successive Approximation
Model

In Part I of Leaving ADDIE for SAM, Allen outlines four
necessary criteria for the ideal process model, each of which are met by SAM.

1. The Process Must Be
Iterative

Development done in small steps with frequent
early evaluation allows for changes that can be modified or reversed at a time
when changes cost the least.

2. The Process Must Support
Collaboration

Project teams that collaborate effectively take
advantage of the ideas, opinions, experiences, and knowledge of team members,
while avoiding bureaucracy and indecision through clear role definitions,
decision-making, documentation, and process flows.

3. The Process Must Be
Efficient and Effective

Recognize that no project is perfect, outline
where energy and resources should be focused and produce usable projects as
quickly as possible.

4. The Process Must Be
Manageable

A manageable process allows
for the completion of projects on time and on budget with a product that meets
established quality criteria.

To
put SAM into practice, design teams have a couple of options. SAM1 is a basic
process well suited for smaller projects led by an individual or small team
where no specialized technical skills (e.g., software programming or video
production) are required (Figure 1). The process cycles through three
iterations with steps familiar to instructional designers—evaluation/analysis,
design, and development—allowing teams to create and refine prototypes along
the way. Ideas and assumptions are discussed and tested early, thus allowing for
relatively quick development of a usable product after only a couple of
iterations.

Figure
1: Basic Successive Approximation Model—SAM1

For
projects with more content or eLearning development that requires more advanced
programming skills, SAM2 is useful (Figure 2). In this model, work is divided
into three distinct phases—preparation, iterative design, and iterative
development.

Preparation
allows the team to gather background information and conduct a “savvy start”—a
brainstorming event bringing the design team and stakeholders together to
review information and create initial prototype ideas.

The
iterative design and iterative development phases are broken down into smaller
incremental steps, allowing teams to make decisions and refine prototypes early
on.

Figure 2: extended successive
approximation model—SAM2

The bottom line

On multiple occasions, Allen
clearly offers that the best model for any designer or developer is the one
that works well for a particular organization—a model that consistently
produces effective learning outcomes on time and on budget. If the ADDIE model
works for you, Allen argues, by all means use it! He offers SAM as an
alternative process utilizing similar tasks, without the traditional
step-by-step requirements of the ADDIE model. That said, Allen does contend
that SAM has its challenges, including work refined too early in the process
and a tendency towards perpetual cycling. For teams thinking of using the SAM
process, including my own, I offer the following advice:

Be
aware of the inherent challenges in any instructional design model or process.

Involve
all project stakeholders (including targeted learners and their supervisors)
early and often.

Consider
content breadth before depth.

Avoid
the first cousin of analysis paralysis—the
iteration station. Three cycles is enough!

Be
open, and welcome feedback and changes to prototypes.

Perhaps the biggest bang for
your buck is found throughout parts two and three of the book. Chock-full of
samples, including a “savvy start” meeting agenda, multiple prototypes, a
project plan, review checklists, and more, Leaving
ADDIE for SAM will be an indispensable resource for instructional designers
and developers looking for a fresh approach that’s less onerous and
process-bound and more iterative and driven by creativity. Tell me, will you be
Leaving ADDIE for SAM?

As with his earlier editions of the e-Learning Annual, Michael Allen has identified the key controversies and
trends affecting the use of technology to enrich the learning experience. Then he found almost three dozen
experts to explore those topics. The result is a mother lode of ideas that will keep you busy for months.

One of the most-discussed sessions at Learning Solutions 2010 was “The Great ADDIE Debate,” a conversation about the 21st-century relevance of the ADDIE process model (Analyze-Design-Develop-Implement-Evaluate), so often employed in instructional design. Rather than declare ADDIE dead, wouldn’t it make more sense to be sure that we are using it properly? Here’s a simple method to do just that.

The makeup of the workforce is changing dramatically, and this requires some adjustments in the way
we design eLearning. Here is a septuplet of tips foraligning your learning application to the preferences
of Generations Y and Z.